In Camera effects adjustments question?

[Not4wood]

Laurie,

I was just reading a review of someones posting about the new Nikon D300 and in this article there was mention of pre-setting the camera for Vivid effects and for more Saturation.

In this article this person was also commenting on that this new camera can give a higher number and much more vibrance to the basic starting image. For example the article says +2 compared to the new D300 giving up to +5 or something like that for a first time comparing it to a higher number for the Canon line.

My question is to why would someone shoot with the more Vivid or more Saturation ON in the camera instead of doing this after in Elements?? I know these features are there, but I am still a newbie to Digital Photography and I cant understand why someone would purposely do this blindly??

What are the benefits to doing this?
I can see why to Not do this. In case the camera gives too much you first have to undo this in Elements and I would rather be adding it then trying to remove it.

Any explaination would be helpful and thanks in advance.

[Codebreaker]

There are a lot of folk that don't want to spend time in front of a computer to adjust images to get a different effect, so I guess this is why the camera vendors make all these fancy options in the camera.

There's also the case where people may also want to print directly from camera.

Personally I think they are marketing gimics. It often takes a while to actually set the effect in the camera by which time the moment has passed. Also these effects are permanent and hard to undo once applied.

In my opinion it's much better to shoot plain images and process on screen.

Colin

[Joe M]

Along these same lines. I read recently it's much better to shoot in color and then use processing to convert a photo to B/W. Instead of using a cameras B/W option.

[Not4wood]

The B&W or the other effects are just a simple way in case somebody doesn't have a good program to make this happen I guess.

But, what would the reason be to up the numbers on Vivid and Saturation? I guess it would be the same thing in camera vs to be able to send straight to the printer? Or is there more to it than that?

I just took a shot increasing the Vivid in my Menu of the Nikon D80. I also noticed in the EXIF Data that the Sharpen Field is also affected as well. I will post the shot and link it here with all the info.

http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/files/1/5/3/1/4/Original_Cleo_Unedited_thumb.jpg (http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=667&c=5)

EXIF DATA:
Nikon D80
2007/11/26 07:02:28.4
JPEG (8-bit) Fine
Image Size: Large (3872 x 2592)
Color
Lens: 18-135mm F/3.5-5.6 G
Focal Length: 75mm
Exposure Mode: Shutter Priority
Metering Mode: Spot
1/100 sec - F/5.6
Exposure Comp.: 0 EV
Sensitivity: ISO 100
Optimize Image: More vivid - This is the only control in my Menu that I changed.
White Balance: Auto
AF Mode: AF-S
Flash Sync Mode: Front Curtain
Flash Mode: Built-in, i-TTL
Auto Flash Comp: 0 EV
Color Mode: Mode IIIa (sRGB) -As a result of the above changed this was also effected.
Tone Comp.: More Contrast -
Hue Adjustment: 0°
Saturation: Enhanced -
Sharpening: High -
Image Comment:
Long Exposure NR: Off
High ISO NR: Off

[RobertSchuldenfrei]

I just took a shot increasing the Vivid in my Menu of the Nikon D80. I also noticed in the EXIF Data that the Sharpen Field is also affected as well. I will post the shot and link it here with all the info.

http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/files/1/5/3/1/4/Original_Cleo_Unedited_thumb.jpg (http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=667&c=5)


Hey Mark,

Your picture raised another issue. How do you light a black cat? I once worked quite awhile trying to take a picture of a friend of mine's black cat. I did not have studio lights and the results were just fair. I ended up using a strobe and some window light, but perhaps Laurie has some suggestions on what to do "in the field" without gear.

Cheers,

Bob

[lexcell]

Hi Mark,
I'm with Colin and Gary about doing these types of adjustments later in the computer. I do believe in getting it right in the camera but, when it comes to the creative control...saturation, B&W, etc I don't the camera making those kinds of decisions for me. I want the creative control over my images. the camera doesn't know what I am trying to communicate...like the tin man in the Wizard of OZ...it does not have a heart

[Not4wood]

Hi Mark,
I'm with Colin and Gary about doing these types of adjustments later in the computer.
Laurie

Laurie,
I agree with this, and I'm wondering why would anybody do this? Is this for the sole purpose of not having a Color Management program and Printing this straight from the camera?
I know several people who print straight from the camera to the printer and if I heaven forbid mention editing the shot, they all but one peron jumps on me saying how there shots don't need it LOL. I can't seem to figure out any other reason why someone would do it?? The reason I originally asked this question is I thought I was missing some important image quality enhancement. LOL


Hey Mark,
Your picture raised another issue. How do you light a black cat?
Cheers,
Bob

Bob,
This drives my wife crazy. She picks up my small little P&S all the time and tries time and again to shoot Little Cleo. My wife is not a photographer and asks me all the time.

Shooting a Black Cat is always a nightmare no matter what you do. Especially if someone is paying you or asking you to do it.

I will be honest with you, there is no easy way except keep trying. I have some shots that have the Flash lighting up her eyes in both a bright yellow and I have a very weird shot of having deep green eyes.

I am including a shot I took at the same time I had done the shot your questioning. I just went in to PE5 and did a lot of editing first for the Levels and then for the Shadows to keep the details at a higher level.

Let me know what you think of this image.

This is Cleo, and this little girl is 18 years old.

http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/files/1/5/3/1/4/CleoEdited_thumb.jpg (http://www.elementsvillage.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=672&c=member&imageuser=15314)

[Codebreaker]

Mark....

Your not missing anything. Picture taking is very subjective. There are scores of people who don't want to be bothered with a computer but still want a little creativity.

Point, shoot, send off for prints - if at all!


As I said before - anything processed in camera is hard to undo afterwards. If you're comfortable processing your own - do it! In fact shoot RAW :)

Colin

[Not4wood]

Hey Colin,

I've actually just started shooting in RAW and I'm seeing the real difference in all the details that can be brought out.

Since I read that article about the In Menu alterations and how that article thought it was the greatest thing next to the Camera itself I thought there was something I was missing. LOL Guess it was Only a Hype.

Thanks to everybody for all of the info.

[RobertSchuldenfrei]

Thanks Mark for the tips on taking pictures of black cats. My daughter Rachel has a cat, but it is a calico so it is easy to get pictures of Clementine. You guys are putting me to shame for not taking more pictures in RAW. I hate to add one thing more to my to-do list, but I fear I must. What about all this free time one is to have when one retires:).

Cheers,

Bob

[Not4wood]

Bob,

Thats easy, you learn while you can now and then go out and shoot to practice..

Later, when you retire you will have all the time in the world to travel and capture all of the great shots using what you have practiced or learned to make better pictures from before. Oops. That before is NOW! :twisted:

RAW: Is our friend. RAW is what makes us great. RAW gives us detail that otherwise wouldn't be there if we shot what everybody else is shooting. Too much underexpose? Too much overexposed?? Did you shoot it in RAW??? Hey, you did! Guess what???? Your shot has all of the Detail that you need because you did shoot it in RAW!

[Codebreaker]

Don't assume that RAW is the panacea for all shots. While it has a higher degree of information than JPEG it still has limits and requires you to get it right in camera as best as possible.

Colin

[TonyW]

One of the neat things about Nikon's Capture NX is that it lets you play with the Nikon in-camera settings on a RAW file and see what it would have done if you had used them. The difference being that with RAW files you can undo the change but once you've done it with in-camera JPEG processing you can't undo it. I don't yet have Capture NX but having tried it I was finally convinced that shooting RAW and processing it later in a RAW editor was by far the best way to go.

But like Colin says, you still have to get the exposure right. A bad shot is a bad shot whether it's RAW or JPEG.

Tony

[Codebreaker]

Hey, your back Tony -- we were wondering where you'd got to!

Colin

[Not4wood]

Don't assume that RAW is the panacea for all shots. While it has a higher degree of information than JPEG it still has limits and requires you to get it right in camera as best as possible.

Colin

Photography itself is a tool with inherant limitations. Once you expose for a good photograph then you try what you can to improve this in the darkroom. There are a multitude of ways the photographer or the camera can mess up a shot, but having a good or better negative/original image to start off with is always the best place to be. Raw is that place. If there is better at the moment let me know. What is better for one, is usually not always better for others and RAW is that thing. If I'm shooting somewhere where I need the speed or I don't care if I have RAW or not then I will shoot in the higher level of JPG. But if there is a shot that I can picture in my head that I know would be one of the greats, I think I would rather shoot it in RAW at the highest detail level instead of JPG. Its like you using only a mediocre film to shoot something important "LIke a Wedding" and after the job is done you realize "Why didn't I use that better film". Your exposures can be right on in both cases but which would you rather have only a good roll of film or shooting that important shot that might put you in a magazine using a great roll of film at that moment?

[lexcell]

It is very important to get it right in the camera...or as right as you possibly can. Then, if you shoot in RAW, you have the abilities to make some adjustments to the RAW file with little to no loss of quality. For anyone who is planning on output to print, likes to work their images in Photoshop or Elements and want s the highest resolution possible you should shoot in RAW.

For folks who shoot for ebay or other internet only type of work. Or, who shoot things like little league where it is a one time make 4X6 prints and move on, jpeg is much quicker and if you settings are correct in camera easily good enough for the job.

There is no one answer....like Mark mentions above...shoot the format that best suits the situation and your needs.